You must log in or # to comment.
Why is the US complaining? This is exactly what they asked for by bringing capitalism back to Russia
Russian capitalism has been good for wealthy Russians, not Americans, so therefore Russia bad.
Leftist parties (socialist and socdem) were doing so well in the Duma after the collapse of the USSR and the Russians got a taste of capitalism that Yeltsin - with the backing of the US - in a metaphorical but also very literal sense - attacked the legislative branch and consolidated all functional power in the executive. Again, with US backing. Putin is just using the levers of power than Yeltsin and Clinton handed to him.
Word. The USSR didn’t collapse. It went down fighting and the capitalists had to stage a series of coups to finish it off, only to lose it to a slightly more capable capitalist.
It’s not that I think Russia is a free and fair democracy, it’s clearly filled with corruption like all liberal democracies. it’s just the misinformation about why and the utter hypocrisy and -100 self-awareness on criticising it.
- Navalny was never that popular, nore were any of the opposition members who were “banned” (for allegedly forging signatures). Nobody contests this, just western media like to act as if he mattered at all, and will never dare admit that the real opposition to Putin is commies (even if name only).
- Russia has not banned any of the actually major opposition parties, while Ukraine actually has explicitly banned almost all opposition.
- Acting like it’s not common practice in all western democracies to deny people from being listed on ballots due to bureaucratic technicalities. They all do it.
- Putin’s vote share does actually line up with widely accepted polls of his popularity. Russia is a country at war with a 1/6th of the world, the West, so it’s little surprise to have an especially high rate now.
My constant reaction to libs arguing Putin is Hitler is “Sure whatever, now admit the state of democracy in your western country is about the same or worse and how that is the problem, Putin isn’t special.”
Acting like it’s not common practice in all western democracies to deny people from being listed on ballots due to bureaucratic technicalities. They all do it.
There are like 2 dozen candidates in the 2024 US general presidential election who will not be listed on any ballots for far less legitimate reasons. Candidates get dropped because they would make the list too long.
I’m pretty sure the average liberal thinks this was supposed to be an election between Navalny and Putin. That’s how misinformed they are.
You’re also right. Putin is massively popular in Russia at a level libs can’t seem to comprehend. The only major opposition he has involve the communists, but they mostly align with Putin’s foreign policy anyway. Most polls show Putin with a 85% approval rating and libs will always think numbers like that are unfair or fabricated.
I’m uncertain if American libs can even conceptualize the idea of a popular government with broad public support. They seem to think that winning more than 55% of votes means the election was rigged and that if a government has an approval rating about 30% they’re faking the poles.
“Sure whatever, now admit the state of democracy in your western country is about the same or worse and how that is the problem, Putin isn’t special.”
Hey wait but isn’t that almost a whataboutism??? CHECKMATE TANKIE
Fuck, you’re right. By pointing out a second, very related problem and how fixing just one achieves nothing, I have committed the cardinal sin of whataboutism and all I have said becomes invalid
whataboutism 
MY GUILT IS PROVED
“Lack of credible opposition”
(According to his Wikipedia article, Kharitonov even quit in the previous political party he was in because it became part of United Russia)
Slutsky lmao
That look too
new hexbear username just dropped
If only Russians had a real choice between Putin and 101% Putin it would have been a wholesome freedom democracy like in the west.
Biden extends one man-rule in America after stage-managed election devoid of credible opposition
1 hour ago • Atheist Jones
Are there elections that aren’t “state-managed?”
For real. US elections are multi-year multi-billion dollar media extravaganzas managed by an army of consultants and media professionals
Remember when the candidate selection vote for the Democrats in several key states used an untested black box app developed by one of the candidates?
Definitely no corruption here
Iowa, you have shocked the nation
Ah, but those consultants and media professionals are all part of the private sector! Same for the RNC and DNC. This is why the US is the only country with free elections.
The Russia Ukraine war for me is a situation where all the players are just bad or worse but goddam is lib rage hilarious
It’s honestly the best part of this war, the libs really go mask off over it.
Is that podium FLOATING?
Russia has spent all of their budget on the war, so they can no longer afford podium stands and speakers have to hold them up themselves.
deleted by creator
Putin won because he was the only candidate capable of a perfectly steady grip.
there’s a thin black metal pole underneath it that’s camouflaged by Putin’s suit. You can see the contours of it if you squint
Replacing all your podiums with vending trays so that candidates can rove through the crowd and distribute snacks while speaking.
How much cooler would debates be if the prime minister handed you a pretzel during the boring speech about social system spending minutiae
Uhh actually when you give people a little treat for voting that’s corruption or some liberal bullshit.
Every newspaper in Britain is running with the ‘no real opposition’ line on the Russian election.
While simultaneously talking non-stop about a snap election between the Tories & Labour.
While also running lots of Tory-soothing stories about how Labour have vowed not to undo Tory policy.
Beyond parody.
I am reminded of Yanis Varoufakis’ story about German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble screaming at him that “elections can not be allowed to change economic policy!”
I’d genuinely forgotten that, but that’s a good pull.
The funniest part is if you look online at news of people queuing at the Russian embassies to vote, it’s always interspersed with mentions of how they’re actually “protests” and how everyone there is turning out to write-in Navalny (LOL). Like, no, it’s obviously cherrypicked examples to align with your country’s position on Russia.
In our country the queue outside the embassy was ginormous, and there are videos of it being shared on social media but no news covering it at all.
Same in Beijing.
Sky News did this with people queuing to vote at the Embassy in London. They found one person who said they were going to spoil their ballot in protest of Putin. They were the only person they got a quote from even though they went back to the street report twice.
Comrade CNN highlights the pointlessness of electoralism to achieve system change
Russians don’t even have a choice between putler and 99% putler, smdh.
Westoid media seems to be making a big deal about the lack of “international observers” to the Russian election. When was the last time you heard about official international observers in western elections?
even wikipedia has this about the observers:
On 14 March, delegations from 36 countries arrived in Russia at the invitation of the Russian Federation Council as foreign observers of the election, who in fact do not represent observer missions but a visitors’ programme.[121][122] On 17 March 2024, the Chair of the Central Election Commission of the Russian Federation (CEC), Ella Pamfilova, announced that 1,115 international observers and experts from 129 countries were monitoring the electoral process.[123] They included Chief Election Commissioner of Pakistan Sikandar Sultan Raja.[124]
so what the media is actually saying they need to have some kkkrackers there to “observe”
Of course these fucks are lying about the observers as well as about everything else
Jeez, I feel so gullible, the propaganda and lies are really EVERYWHERE aren’t they? Just how prudent does one need to be…
It is actually pretty common practice for international observers to be present in western elections
In Russia, you are given exactly one option for President and everyone is required to agree that he is the only person fit to lead the country.
In America, you are given three choices. One of them is a senile baffoon who will most assuredly spell the end of the Republic if he is elected. The other is a throwback to the 1980s who is coasting entirely on name recognition. And the third is a failson without any credible leadership qualities, who simply runs because he doesn’t have anything better to do.
One of these countries will have 75% election turnout. The other will be lucky to crack 60%. Care to guess which?
To anglos it is common knowledge that a war-time president who holds off the hated enemy and manages to stabilize the country while somewhat improving or at least maintaining standards of living will be very unpopular and lose elections.
